NY was an emerging market back then. Labor and land was cheaper, demand was higher for prestige statements, regulation was less, it was a gold rush era. Today they rely on residential luxury real estate and the global market to fuel demand for such taller towers which is not immune to drastic change and thus massive losses in investment. The office market for these buildings is not there. RISK is too high for any such tower in NYC unless everything is changed, politics, labor, etc.. The tallest buildings in the world are far easier to build elsewhere thus they will remain elsewhere.

NY was an emerging market back then. Labor and land was cheaper, demand was higher for prestige statements, regulation was less, it was a gold rush era. Today they rely on residential luxury real estate and the global market to fuel demand for such taller towers which is not immune to drastic change and thus massive losses in investment. The office market for these buildings is not there. RISK is too high for any such tower in NYC unless everything is changed, politics, labor, etc.. The tallest buildings in the world are far easier to build elsewhere thus they will remain elsewhere.

I have to disagree with you on this. Labor was cheaper back then, but costs were as well. Risk was as high as it is today, both the Empire State Building and the Twin Towers were sitting empty for very long before finally filling up. The difference of expenses between the US and the developing world was just as pronounced as it is today, so it was easier to build a WTB in Asia just as it is today, yet despite all of this, it was the US that was building these WTBs, not Asia. Demand is not everything, NYC knew it in the 19th and 20th century, Asia knows it in the 21st century, and I think it is only a matter of time before NYC rediscovers it in the 21st century

__________________The Outbreak: A free browser online strategy game. Build up your town and compete with other towns economicaly and militarily.http://www.the-outbreak.com/

There is no need for the tallest building in NYC and therefore it won't be built. NY has no need for a tower that will sit empty, it builds if demand is available.. Signature or not, the costs and risk are too high for any kind of 'cherry on top'. I can see taller towers, but the probability of a tallest is very small if the following problems are not sorted out:

The hurdles are just too big. In 50 years the tallest will be even taller than the current crop. NY can't compete with other cities n more favorable countries on these issues.

Emerging markets will mature = cheaper luxury investments abroad and less demand in NYC for luxury high rises.
Far cheaper and easier to build show piece towers in other countries, and that will remain unless political systems are completely changed in many of these countries.

if the emerging markets mature, then labor and other associated costs will go up in those markets.

the demand for super lux in NYC is mostly people trying to get their money out of their country into a safer investment if things go tits up.
pretty much any multimillionaire/billionaire in china could be brought up on corruption charges and executed if they piss off the wrong people. just how business is done.

I dont get how you can say that demand is not everything. Without demand, how are you going to make a profit on your investment? Demand is King in RE development. Without rents how do you pay off the loan?

Nobody builds a tower these days in the US without market research to determine if adequate demand is there to get the financing required. This prestige argument you are using is quite frankly, way out of touch with reality. Nobody builds for presetige in American any more unless the numbers work. This is unlikely. If it were so, we would see the tallest here now. The demand just isn't there and probably won't be in the future either as these tall towers are just too expensive to build here.

if the emerging markets mature, then labor and other associated costs will go up in those markets.

the demand for super lux in NYC is mostly people trying to get their money out of their country into a safer investment if things go tits up.
pretty much any multimillionaire/billionaire in china could be brought up on corruption charges and executed if they piss off the wrong people. just how business is done.

Thre will be opportunity before complete market maturation when prices remain more attractive and the risk of investing in these emerging markets is reduced. These countries have a long way to go before they can reach Western levels of costs and regulatory hurdles. Further political reform and stability of course would be a bad thing for NY's luxury market as competition will increase. More opportunities to invest at cheaper prices elsewhere and less risk in doing so. It is unlikely that the costs of land and labor elsewhere in these areas could approach NY for many decades, maybe even centuries given the ridiculous costs of building in nYC and all the regulatory, tax and union issues.

I dont get how you can say that demand is not everything. Without demand, how are you going to make a profit on your investment? Demand is King in RE development. Without rents how do you pay off the loan?

Nobody builds a tower these days in the US without market research to determine if adequate demand is there to get the financing required. This prestige argument you are using is quite frankly, way out of touch with reality. Nobody builds for presetige in American any more unless the numbers work. This is unlikely. If it were so, we would see the tallest here now. The demand just isn't there and probably won't be in the future either as these tall towers are just too expensive to build here.

But why? Why is "these days" any different from "those days"? Were the Empire State Building and Twin Towers a big loss? They eventually became the most profitable buildings in the city, despite a lack of demand. The fact that they were WTBs brought an all new demand, namely secondary demand. They became tourist attractions and they increased the economic output of nearby areas. Even if they were not immediately directly profitable, they eventually brought more profit than any of the purely economic buildings. Raising the value of a whole area can be a very profitable venture and let me ask you this: How many people know about the Empire State Building? And how many people know about for example One Liberty Plaza? Prestige is a big difference. The Empire State Building sat empty for a horrendous ammount of years, yet now it is a superb tenant magnet. It's iconic status has brought even more demand. Of course, you can't build a whole city full of WTBs but one truly tall building is an essential part of every large construction boom in major cities

__________________The Outbreak: A free browser online strategy game. Build up your town and compete with other towns economicaly and militarily.http://www.the-outbreak.com/

Tell me this is a joke! I mean this is the most ugly design I've ever seen! Shape, structure, image, everything is wrong.
The exact place of building is even worse than the tower itself.
I hope it never happens.